Woops. I missed the thread hierarchy. :-(
If you're using new-enough synaptics, MFS of r281708 and r281709 in
stable/10 would be sufficient.
If you're using "semi-MT one as mentioned by Jan Kokem〓ller (like me),
you should additionally need applying his patch.
Clarifying a bit more about my case
On 4/26/15, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> On 4/23/15, Oliver Pinter wrote:
>> Rui, FYI:
>> http://w1.fi/security/2015-1/wpa_supplicant-p2p-ssid-overflow.txt
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Please test the new wpa_supplicant/hostapd. Here's the patch against
>>>
On 4/23/15, Oliver Pinter wrote:
> Rui, FYI: http://w1.fi/security/2015-1/wpa_supplicant-p2p-ssid-overflow.txt
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Please test the new wpa_supplicant/hostapd. Here's the patch against
>> FreeBSD
>> HEAD:
>>
>> https://people.
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 13:26:09 -0700 (MST)
r00ster wrote:
Jan,
Thanks for your work! Running 'mostly' OK for me. (See below)
Without your patch, two finger scrolling didn't work for me.
r00ster,
Applicable to stable/10 amd64 at r281732 and r281981, and running for
me, but I haven't tried releas
By the way, just to clarify my question, what I'm asking is if it's possible
for me to put the relevant additions from this patch for two-finger
scrolling into 10.1. This is a feature I've really been looking forward to,
so thank you very much for the work you put into it. :)
--
View this messa
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 9:39 AM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever
> >>> that
> >>> the offset on the directory fd that isn't something ret
Do you know if this patch can be applied to 10.1 RELEASE?
--
View this message in context:
http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/Call-For-Testers-Synaptics-touchpads-tp6003555p6007628.html
Sent from the freebsd-current mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 9:39 AM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever
> >>> that
> >>> the offset on the directory fd that isn't something ret
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 5:52 AM, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever that
> >> the offset on the directory fd that isn't something returned by
> >> getdirentries has a
On 24/04/2015 12:05, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Apr 24, 2015, at 3:03, Garrett Cooper
> wrote:
>
>> On Apr 24, 2015, at 2:59, Garrett Cooper
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 2:05, Willem Jan Withagen
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 22/04/2015 23:37, Ed Maste wrote:
> On 22 April 2015 at 15:
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 4:28 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 25, 2015 02:36:24 AM Julian Elischer wrote:
> >> On 4/25/15 1:30 AM, Julian Elischer wrote:
> >>> On 4/24/15 10:59 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Friday, April 24, 2015 01:02:39 PM Julian Elischer wrote:
> >>
Jilles Toelker wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> > Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever that
> > the offset on the directory fd that isn't something returned by
> > getdirentries has any meaning. In particular, the size of the
> > dir
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 9:39 AM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever
> >>> that
> >>> the offset on the directory fd that isn't something ret
Julian Elischer wrote:
> On 4/25/15 9:39 AM, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 04:28:12PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> >>> Yes, this isn't at all safe. There's no guarantee whatsoever
> >>> that
> >>> the offset on the directory fd that isn't something ret
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:52:49PM +0100, John wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running 11.0-CURRENT #0 r281867. I've followed the instructions
> given at
> https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/disks-encrypting.html
> section 18.12.2.
>
> I was able to create the encrypted slice and
On 23 Apr 2015, at 00:12, Craig Rodrigues wrote:
>
> While not as smooth as clicking a merge button in GitHub,
> this is a valid way to accept patches submitted via GitHub pull requests,
> and integrate them in our FreeBSD Subversion repo.
The merge button on GitHub does the wrong thing anyway (
16 matches
Mail list logo
